-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
[spf-helper people, please follow up to spf-webmasters.]
Hi all,
for the past two weeks during which the new contact form has been operatio-
nal, the form's message dispatcher has CC'ed me on all the submissions so
I would get a representative view on what kind of messages people submit.
About a week ago I then added the topic selector that lets submitters
choose from the following topics and dispatches messages to the according
destinations:
Support request => [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Media inquiry => [EMAIL PROTECTED]
The SPF website => [email protected]
Other => [EMAIL PROTECTED]
So far I see the following problems:
1. People make submissions under the topics "The SPF website" or "Other"
that are actually support requests, because they are too stupid to
select the correct topic.
2. People make submissions under the topics "The SPF website" or "Other"
that are actually complaints (sometimes offensive), because...
a. they have misunderstood the meaning of error messages they got
(ex: "Who the hell asked you to censor my mail? The NSA?"), or
b. they have misunderstood the basic concept of SPF
(ex: "UNSUBSCRIBE me from your database!")
(Mixed forms are of course possible. Did I miss other typical problems?)
I'm not sure we can do anything about problem 1. Personally, I have had a
HARD time resisting the urge to reply and simply tell them to try again
with the correct topic. From a public relations perspective the correct
thing to do would probably be to resend (redirect, bounce) the message
contained in the moderation request to [EMAIL PROTECTED] There's a
technical problem with that, though: these contained messages have already
been processed by the listbox software and are missing their original
"Sender: SPF Website Contact Form ..." header, so Koen's system rejects
them. Koen, could you change the check for the "Sender" header into a
check for an "X-Mailer: SPF Website Contact Form" header?
About problem 2. Should we introduce a "Complaint" topic, well knowing
that due to the very nature of SPF, most complaints made to _us_ will
really be unjustified and due to ignorance? If yes: where should
complaints be dispatched? The support RT? As for how to respond to those
complaints, should we set up a "Misunderstandings" section on the website
and point the complainants to that? Should we try to preempt the most
frequent types of complaints ("Stop blocking my mail!", "The blocked
message was not spam!", "Remove me from your database!") by debilitating
them right above the contact form?
I originally decided to have "Other" submissions dispatched to spf-council
because I knew of no other appropriate list and I didn't want to have them
dispatched just to me personally (for handling or mere structural analysis
directed toward further refinement of the contact form) for reasons of
transparency and in order to not create a single point of failure. I
still think it is a valid idea to keep adding new topics (with appropriate
dispatch targets) to the selector whenever someone makes an "Other"
submission that is out of place for spf-council and that is not just an
obvious topic mis-selection that can be redirected to the correct
destination manually.
What do you think?
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.3 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQFEd522wL7PKlBZWjsRAg/wAKCWjPtJcC4eEEaUiwrM1LopVHy8kACfc/KQ
SBNXJFCo9U3DxDVJ7YWp8BQ=
=0Swm
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
-------
To unsubscribe, change your address, or temporarily deactivate your
subscription,
please go to http://v2.listbox.com/member/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
